Gonzalez-Corona

Gonzalez-Corona v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
36 F. App'x 634
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 2002No. 00-70552; INS No. A70-815-459California343 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Adolfo Gonzalez-Corona petitions for review of the final decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal of an immigration judge’s denial of his application for suspension of deportation. Pursuant to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”), the transitional rules apply, see Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997), and we therefore have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), as amended by IIRIRA § 309(c), see Avetova-Elisseva v. INS, 213 F.3d 1192 , 1195 n. 4 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition for review.

Gonzalez-Corona contends that § 309(c)(5) of IIRIRA deprives him of due process because it is unconstitutionally vague in its application of the “stop-time rule.” We disagree.

In Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001), we held that there is “only one reasonable interpretation” of § 309(c)(5)— that it applies to transitional rule aliens such as Gonzalez-Corona. Accordingly, § 309(c)(5) is not unconstitutionally vague.

Gonzalez-Corona further contends that the statute is unconstitutionally vague as applied to individuals convicted of certain crimes. Gonzalez-Corona lacks…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.